1-20 of 67 results for subject:Sanctions
Librarians' tools
- Search time
- 0.292 seconds
- Solr query time
- 0.006 seconds
- Search query
- subject:Sanctions
- We searched for
- subject_t:Sanctions OR subject_t:Boycotts OR subject_t:"Economic sanctions" OR subject_t:Embargoes OR subject_ses:92899
Answering member
X
Jack Straw
Type
House
Session
Year
Department
Member
Primary member
Answering member
More
Straw, Jack (67)
Legislative stage
Legislation
Subject
More
Publisher
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what progress has been made in imposing targeted sanctions in Sudan; and if he will make a statement.
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what progress has been made in imposing targeted sanctions in Sudan; and if he will make a statement.
Asked by
Lord Hague of Richmond
(Conservative)
Answered by
Jack Straw
(Labour)
Answering body
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Tabled on
30 January 2006
For answer on
1 February 2006
Answered on
8 February 2006
The Panel of Experts established under UN Security Council Resolution 1591 presented their report and recommendations to the Sanctions Committee on 23 December 2005. Discussions on the Panel's recommendations, including on the imposition of sanctions on individuals, continue in the Sanctions Committee in New York. We are pressing for swift action on the Panel's recommendations.
Subjects
Sanctions; Sudan
Date
8 February 2006
Reference
47635; 442 c1258-9W;442 c1259W
House
House of Commons
I last discussed Zimbabwe with South African Foreign Minister Dr. Zuma on 21 September. I will see her again on 7 November at the EU-South Africa Co-operation Council in Brussels. I will again impress on her the very fast deterioration in conditions in Zimbabwe. Tens of thousands of Zimbabweans remain homeless after their Government's callous eviction campaign and nearly 3 million people are in need of food assistance over the next six months. Inflation has reached 360 per cent. in the past year and is still rising, but the Government of Zimbabwe have just seen fit to reject offers of United Nations assistance. I discussed that yesterday with Secretary-General Kofi Annan, and I strongly endorse the statement that he issued yesterday which expressed profound concern about the situation in Zimbabwe. While sanctions imposed and tightened by the European Union and the United States are necessary, southern African nations have a key role to play in pressuring the Government of Zimbabwe for change.
I last discussed Zimbabwe with South African Foreign Minister Dr. Zuma on 21 September. I will see her again on 7 November at the EU-South Africa Co-operation Council in Brussels. I will again impress on her the very fast deterioration in conditions in Zimbabwe. Tens of thousands of Zimbabweans remain homeless after their Government's callous eviction campaign and nearly 3 million people are in need of food assistance over the next six months. Inflation has reached 360 per cent. in the past year and is still rising, but the Government of Zimbabwe have just seen fit to reject offers of United Nations assistance. I discussed that yesterday with Secretary-General Kofi Annan, and I strongly endorse the statement that he issued yesterday which expressed profound concern about the situation in Zimbabwe. While sanctions imposed and tightened by the European Union and the United States are necessary, southern African nations have a key role to play in pressuring the Government of Zimbabwe for change.
Answered by
Jack Straw
(Labour)
Asked by
Nigel Evans
(Conservative)
Answering body
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
Type
Oral answers to questions
When he last met his counterpart in South Africa to discuss the security and economic situation in Zimbabwe.
Subjects
Human rights; Food; Homelessness; Foreign relations; Politics and government; South Africa; Sanctions; Zimbabwe
Date
1 November 2005
Reference
438 c718
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
The hon. Gentleman is right to be angry and concerned about the situation, and his feelings are shared on both sides of the House. The situation is frustrating, because southern African nations are the ones suffering the most—apart from the terrible plight of the Zimbabweans—from the wrecking of Zimbabwe's economy and society by Mugabe. However, trying to persuade them to take action or even to put strong pressure on the Mugabe regime is hard going. We will continue to do so and to take every opportunity to do so. I just hope that southern African leaders understand the urgency of the situation, not only for the people of Zimbabwe, but for their own societies which are now suffering high levels of unemployment, asylum seekers and infections such as HIV/AIDS, which now infects a quarter of the total population of Zimbabwe, as a result of Mugabe's criminally irresponsible policies.
The hon. Gentleman is right to be angry and concerned about the situation, and his feelings are shared on both sides of the House. The situation is frustrating, because southern African nations are the ones suffering the most—apart from the terrible plight of the Zimbabweans—from the wrecking of Zimbabwe's economy and society by Mugabe. However, trying to persuade them to take action or even to put strong pressure on the Mugabe regime is hard going. We will continue to do so and to take every opportunity to do so. I just hope that southern African leaders understand the urgency of the situation, not only for the people of Zimbabwe, but for their own societies which are now suffering high levels of unemployment, asylum seekers and infections such as HIV/AIDS, which now infects a quarter of the total population of Zimbabwe, as a result of Mugabe's criminally irresponsible policies.
Answered by
Jack Straw
(Labour)
Asked by
Nigel Evans
(Conservative)
Answering body
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
Type
Oral answers to questions
With inflation running at 360 per cent., GDP set to fall by 7 per cent. this year, 700,000 people being evicted from their homes, 75 per cent. of people living below the poverty level, the Government refusing food aid, 3,000 people a week dying of AIDS-related illnesses and ambulances running out of fuel, Zimbabwe is a paradise lost. What extra action does the Foreign Secretary believe that South Africa in particular, and sub-Saharan African nations in the regions generally, should take to give the people of Zimbabwe some help and some hope for the future?
Subjects
Human rights; Food; Homelessness; Foreign relations; Politics and government; South Africa; Sanctions; Zimbabwe
Date
1 November 2005
Reference
438 c718-9
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
I will certainly do so. Of course, as I have said already, I understand fully the concerns on both sides of the House. Our EU sanctions have been strengthened. They are working. They were targeted at individuals at the top of the regime, not at ordinary people who are suffering under the regime. We have also had a discussion in the Security Council. I wish that we could have a resolution in the Security Council; but so far, we have not been able to persuade at least nine of our colleagues on the Security Council to move for a resolution. We shall continue at every opportunity to push for such a resolution.
I will certainly do so. Of course, as I have said already, I understand fully the concerns on both sides of the House. Our EU sanctions have been strengthened. They are working. They were targeted at individuals at the top of the regime, not at ordinary people who are suffering under the regime. We have also had a discussion in the Security Council. I wish that we could have a resolution in the Security Council; but so far, we have not been able to persuade at least nine of our colleagues on the Security Council to move for a resolution. We shall continue at every opportunity to push for such a resolution.
Answered by
Jack Straw
(Labour)
Asked by
Baroness McIntosh of Pickering
(Conservative)
Answering body
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
Type
Oral answers to questions
President Mugabe has failed not only the Zimbabwean people, but the whole African continent. Clearly, the Foreign Secretary's diplomatic efforts are simply not working. From being a net exporter of food, Zimbabwe is now completely dependent on food imports. In spite of a damning UN report, no further action has been taken after the atrocities of the urban clearances. EU sanctions appear not to be working because most of the legitimate efforts are being channelled elsewhere. Will he please use his good offices to impress on the South African high commissioner to this country that our patience is rapidly running out?
Subjects
Human rights; Food; Homelessness; Foreign relations; Politics and government; South Africa; Sanctions; Zimbabwe
Date
1 November 2005
Reference
438 c720
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
We do have diplomatic relations with Zimbabwe. I happen to believe that that is right and is also a way to ensure that the interests of the 70,000 to 80,000 British passport holders in Zimbabwe are protected. It also ensures that we have a good flow of information and understanding about the situation in Zimbabwe. That being so, I am afraid that we do have to follow common courtesies in respect of our relations. The other option would be to break off those diplomatic relations. The visit by the officials was not a courtesy visit: it was to see whether—and if so, in what circumstances—those who are returned to Zimbabwe as failed asylum seekers suffer as a result of the regime. My hon. Friend will know that those circumstances were the subject of a recent judgment by the High Court.
We do have diplomatic relations with Zimbabwe. I happen to believe that that is right and is also a way to ensure that the interests of the 70,000 to 80,000 British passport holders in Zimbabwe are protected. It also ensures that we have a good flow of information and understanding about the situation in Zimbabwe. That being so, I am afraid that we do have to follow common courtesies in respect of our relations. The other option would be to break off those diplomatic relations. The visit by the officials was not a courtesy visit: it was to see whether—and if so, in what circumstances—those who are returned to Zimbabwe as failed asylum seekers suffer as a result of the regime. My hon. Friend will know that those circumstances were the subject of a recent judgment by the High Court.
Answered by
Jack Straw
(Labour)
Asked by
Baroness Hoey
(Labour)
Answering body
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
Type
Oral answers to questions
I welcome my right hon. Friend's comments, but in view of the continued atrocities and the ban on Ministers travelling, can he explain why two officials from his Department and three officials from the Home Office, who visited Zimbabwe recently to examine the asylum seekers issue, paid a courtesy call to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the immigration department? In answer to a written question, I was told that those were courtesy visits.
Subjects
Human rights; Food; Homelessness; Foreign relations; Politics and government; South Africa; Sanctions; Zimbabwe
Date
1 November 2005
Reference
438 c719
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
When he last met his counterpart in South Africa to discuss the security and economic situation in Zimbabwe.
When he last met his counterpart in South Africa to discuss the security and economic situation in Zimbabwe.
Asked by
Nigel Evans
(Conservative)
Answered by
Jack Straw
(Labour)
Answering body
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
Oral questions - Lead
Status
Answered
Tabled on
26 October 2005
For answer on
1 November 2005
Answered on
1 November 2005
I last discussed Zimbabwe with South African Foreign Minister Dr. Zuma on 21 September. I will see her again on 7 November at the EU-South Africa Co-operation Council in Brussels. I will again impress on her the very fast deterioration in conditions in Zimbabwe. Tens of thousands of Zimbabweans remain homeless after their Government's callous eviction campaign and nearly 3 million people are in need of food assistance over the next six months. Inflation has reached 360 per cent. in the past year and is still rising, but the Government of Zimbabwe have just seen fit to reject offers of United Nations assistance. I discussed that yesterday with Secretary-General Kofi Annan, and I strongly endorse the statement that he issued yesterday which expressed profound concern about the situation in Zimbabwe. While sanctions imposed and tightened by the European Union and the United States are necessary, southern African nations have a key role to play in pressuring the Government of Zimbabwe for change.
Subjects
Human rights; Food; Homelessness; Foreign relations; Politics and government; South Africa; Sanctions; Zimbabwe
Date
1 November 2005
Reference
438 c718; 23248
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
I know of no circumstances in which individuals returned to South Africa have been in danger from the Zimbabwe Government. So I hope that I can give that assurance, and I will check on it with my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary straight after this session of questions. This is a difficult issue. I, too, have failed asylum seekers in my constituency. In every case where failed asylum seekers have been returned to Zimbabwe, to the very best of my knowledge, they have not come to any harm. I understand the concern on both sides of the House, but the House is very insistent when in a different mood that, while we give a safe haven to genuine refugees, we do not provide a refuge to those who cannot justify their claim to refugee status before independent judicial authorities.
I know of no circumstances in which individuals returned to South Africa have been in danger from the Zimbabwe Government. So I hope that I can give that assurance, and I will check on it with my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary straight after this session of questions. This is a difficult issue. I, too, have failed asylum seekers in my constituency. In every case where failed asylum seekers have been returned to Zimbabwe, to the very best of my knowledge, they have not come to any harm. I understand the concern on both sides of the House, but the House is very insistent when in a different mood that, while we give a safe haven to genuine refugees, we do not provide a refuge to those who cannot justify their claim to refugee status before independent judicial authorities.
Answered by
Jack Straw
(Labour)
Asked by
Alistair Burt
(Conservative)
Answering body
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
Type
Oral answers to questions
I received a fax this lunchtime from six Zimbabwean asylum seekers who are currently detained in my constituency at Yarl's Wood. They travelled on South African passports, which is a well known escape route and they are due to be deported to South Africa, despite the current ban on returning Zimbabweans to that country. They are terrified by the prospect because of the known close relationship between the Zimbabwean and South African security forces. Can the Foreign Secretary guarantee the safety of those women if they are returned to South Africa; and if not, will he intervene to stop their deportation?
Subjects
Human rights; Food; Homelessness; Foreign relations; Politics and government; South Africa; Sanctions; Zimbabwe
Date
1 November 2005
Reference
438 c719-20
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
His Excellency the Right Hon. Paul Boateng is playing a very fine role in South Africa, as all of us would expect. There is a constant dialogue with the South African Government at every level. The South African Government fully understand what is happening. What they will say is that their view of what should be done is different from ours. I happen to take a different view. That dialogue must continue, and we will continue it, not least in the meeting at which I shall see Dr. Zuma next Monday.
His Excellency the Right Hon. Paul Boateng is playing a very fine role in South Africa, as all of us would expect. There is a constant dialogue with the South African Government at every level. The South African Government fully understand what is happening. What they will say is that their view of what should be done is different from ours. I happen to take a different view. That dialogue must continue, and we will continue it, not least in the meeting at which I shall see Dr. Zuma next Monday.
Answered by
Jack Straw
(Labour)
Asked by
Lindsay Hoyle
(Labour)
Answering body
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
Type
Oral answers to questions
I know that my right hon. Friend has concerns about Zimbabwe, but the big issue is what role the African nations can play. What role is our new high commissioner playing in trying to persuade South Africa to use some sanctions, which is what it will take if we are to break the evil regime of Mugabe? What else can we do, and what role is our high commission playing?
Subjects
Human rights; Food; Homelessness; Foreign relations; Politics and government; South Africa; Sanctions; Zimbabwe
Date
1 November 2005
Reference
438 c720
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what reports his Department has received concerning the fundraising mission to the UK earlier in 2005 of Dr Ghulam Adam from Zimbabwe; what action his Department has taken to ensure there has been no breach of the European Union's...
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what reports his Department has received concerning the fundraising mission to the UK earlier in 2005 of Dr Ghulam Adam from Zimbabwe; what action his Department has taken to ensure there has been no breach of the European Union's...
Asked by
Marquess of Lothian
(Conservative)
Answered by
Jack Straw
(Labour)
Answering body
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Tabled on
22 March 2005
For answer on
4 April 2005
Answered on
4 April 2005
Mr. Ancram: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what reports his Department has received concerning
the fundraising mission to the UK earlier in 2005 of Dr. Ghulam Adam from Zimbabwe; what action his Department has taken to ensure
there has been no breach of the European Union's restrictive measures against Zimbabwe; and what action can be taken against
individuals who may have donated money in contravention of the EU restrictions. [223866]
Mr. Straw: The Foreign and Commonwealth Office received uncorroborated reports earlier this year that Dr. Adam had previously been
in the UK conducting fund-raising for ZANU-PF. Fund-raising for a political party is not in itself a breach of EU sanctions on
Zimbabwe. These sanctions provide that `no funds or economic resources shall be made available directly or indirectly to or for the
benefit of natural or legal persons, entities or bodies listed',
a list which includes individual leading members of the Zimbabwean regime and of ZANU-PF but not the party itself. An offence would
therefore have been committed only if the object or effect of the fund-raising was to give funds directly or indirectly to persons
subject to the sanctions, and we have not received actionable evidence to that effect. We refer all credible allegations that the EU
sanctions may have been broken to the relevant UK authorities. Those responsible for breaching sanctions are liable for prosecution.
Subjects
Fundraising; Sanctions; Zimbabwe; EU external relations; ZANU-PF
Date
4 April 2005
Reference
432 c1235W; 223866
House
House of Commons
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what discussions he has had with his (a) Russian and (b) Australian counterparts concerning the proposed lifting of the EU arms embargo on China with respect to the effects on (i) Chinese military capabilities, (ii) the political situation with...
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what discussions he has had with his (a) Russian and (b) Australian counterparts concerning the proposed lifting of the EU arms embargo on China with respect to the effects on (i) Chinese military capabilities, (ii) the political situation with...
Asked by
Marquess of Lothian
(Conservative)
Answered by
Jack Straw
(Labour)
Answering body
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Tabled on
8 March 2005
For answer on
16 March 2005
Answered on
16 March 2005
Mr. Ancram: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what discussions he has had with his
(a) Russian and (b) Australian counterparts concerning the proposed lifting of the EU arms embargo on China with
respect to the effects on (i) Chinese military capabilities, (ii) the political situation with regard to the Taiwan Strait and (iii)
observance of human rights by the Chinese Government. [221358]
Mr. Straw: [holding answer 15 March 2005]: I have had no recent discussions with my Russian and Australian counterparts on
the issue of the embargo.
We take every appropriate opportunity to convey to the Taiwanese authorities, through informal channels, and to the Chinese
Government our strong opposition to the use of force or to any action that raises cross- Strait tensions.
We remain deeply concerned about human rights abuses in China and monitor the situation closely. We regularly raise our concerns
with the Chinese Government.
Subjects
Arms trade; Australia; China; Human rights; EU external trade; Sanctions; Russia; Taiwan
Date
16 March 2005
Reference
432 c338W;432 c336W; 221358
House
House of Commons
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, pursuant to the Answer of 7th December 2004, 428 c476W, whether the Government would be bound by a decision of the European Council to suspend the arms embargo against China; whether the United Kingdom can unilaterally impose an arms...
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, pursuant to the Answer of 7th December 2004, 428 c476W, whether the Government would be bound by a decision of the European Council to suspend the arms embargo against China; whether the United Kingdom can unilaterally impose an arms...
Asked by
Marquess of Lothian
(Conservative)
Answered by
Jack Straw
(Labour)
Answering body
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Tabled on
13 December 2004
For answer on
20 December 2004
Answered on
20 December 2004
Mr. Ancram: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs pursuant to the answer of 7 December 2004,
Official Report, column 476W, whether the Government would be bound by a decision of the European Council to suspend the arms
embargo against China; whether the United Kingdom can unilaterally impose an arms embargo on China; and if he will make a statement.
[205325]
Mr. Straw: Any decision to lift the EU Arms Embargo on China would have to be taken by unanimous agreement of all EU member states,
including the UK. EU control of defence equipment exports to China would continue to be governed by the EU Code of Conduct on Arms
Exports. It is possible, irrespective of the existence of an EU arms embargo on a country, for a member state to impose a national
embargo on that country (as is the case with the UK's embargo on Iran) although arms embargoes are very much more effective when
applied multilaterally.
Subjects
Arms trade; Defence equipment; China; Export controls; EU action; Sanctions
Date
20 December 2004
Reference
205325; 428 c1396-7W;428 c1397W
House
House of Commons
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, which EU-Burmese joint ventures have been affected by Annex II of the Council Common Position on Burma 2004/730/CFSP and Annex IV of Council Regulation (EC) 798/2004. - Inc ref to 18 November 2004, 426 c1778W.
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, which EU-Burmese joint ventures have been affected by Annex II of the Council Common Position on Burma 2004/730/CFSP and Annex IV of Council Regulation (EC) 798/2004. - Inc ref to 18 November 2004, 426 c1778W.
Asked by
Marquess of Lothian
(Conservative)
Answered by
Jack Straw
(Labour)
Answering body
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Tabled on
1 December 2004
For answer on
8 December 2004
Answered on
8 December 2004
Mr. Ancram: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs which EU-Burmese joint ventures have been affected by
Annex II of the Council Common Position on Burma 2004/730/CFSP and Annex IV of Council Regulation (EC) 798/2004. [202845]
Mr. Straw: I refer the right hon. Gentleman to the reply I gave him on 18 November 2004, Official Report, column 1778W.
We are aware that one EU company has claimed that they have been erroneously implicated through the listings of state owned
enterprises in Annex II of the Common Position on Burma 2004/730/CFSP and Annex IV of Council Regulation 798/2004.
We are not aware at present that any other EU- Burmese joint ventures have been affected.
Subjects
EU countries; EU law; EU external trade; Foreign investment; Joint ventures; Subsidiary companies; Sanctions; Myanmar; EU external relations
Date
8 December 2004
Reference
202845; 428 c599W
House
House of Commons
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, whether Article 8a of Council Regulation (EC) 798/2004, as inserted by Article 1 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1853/2004, will prevent persons resident in, or companies registered in, the EU from entering into joint venture partnerships with Burmese state-owned...
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, whether Article 8a of Council Regulation (EC) 798/2004, as inserted by Article 1 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1853/2004, will prevent persons resident in, or companies registered in, the EU from entering into joint venture partnerships with Burmese state-owned...
Asked by
Marquess of Lothian
(Conservative)
Answered by
Jack Straw
(Labour)
Answering body
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Tabled on
11 November 2004
For answer on
18 November 2004
Answered on
18 November 2004
Mr. Ancram: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (1) whether Article 8a of Council Regulation (EC)
798/2004, as inserted by Article 1 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1853/2004, will prevent persons resident in, or companies
registered in, the EU from entering into joint venture partnerships with Burmese state-owned enterprises listed in Annex IV;
[198385]
(2) whether Article 8a of Council Regulation (EC) 798/2004 will apply to Burmese-registered subsidiary companies, wholly-owned or
otherwise, of companies registered in the EU; [198386]
(3) what is meant by the phrase `the acquisition of a participation' in a Burmese state-owned enterprise within Article
8a(1)(b) , of Council Regulation (EC) 798/2004. [198387]
Mr. Straw: I refer the hon. Gentleman to Articles 8a(l) , 8a(2) and 14 of the Council Regulation (EC) 798/ 2004 (Official
Journal, L 125, 28.4.2004, p.4), as amended by Council Regulation (EC) No. 1853/2004 (Official Journal, L 323, 26.10.2004, p.11).
Paragraph 1 of Article 8a prohibits: "(a) the granting of any financial loan to Burmese state-owned enterprises as listed in Annex
IV, or the acquisition of bonds, certificates of deposit, warrants or debentures, issued by these enterprises. (b) the acquisition
or extension of a participation in Burmese state-owned enterprises as listed in Annex IV. including the acquisition in full of such
enterprises and the acquisition of shares and securities of a participating nature."
Paragraph 2 of Article 8a provides that: "The participation, knowing and intentionally, in activities, the object or effect of which
is, directly or indirectly, to circumvent the provisions of paragraph 1 shall be prohibited."
Article 14 provides that the Regulation shall apply: "(a) within the territory of the Community, including its airspace; (b) on
board any aircraft or any vessel under the jurisdiction of a member state; (c) to any person inside or outside the territory of the
Community who is a national of a member state; (d) to any legal person, group or entity which is incorporated or constituted under
the law of a member state: (e) to any legal person, group or entity doing business within the Community."
The application of these and the other provisions of Council Regulation (EC) No. 798/2004 in any given case will depend on all the
facts and circumstances, and persons who think they may be affected should seek independent legal advice. It would not be
appropriate for the Government to attempt to interpret the EC legislation on their behalf.
Subjects
Companies; EU countries; EU law; EU external trade; Foreign investment; Joint ventures; Subsidiary companies; Sanctions; Myanmar; EU external relations
Date
18 November 2004
Reference
426 c1778W;426 c1782W; 198385;198386;198387
House
House of Commons
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what criteria were applied for a state-owned enterprise's inclusion in Annex II of the Council Common Position on Burma 2004/730/CFSP and Annex IV of Council Regulation (EC) 798/2004, as inserted by Article 1(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1853/2004;...
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what criteria were applied for a state-owned enterprise's inclusion in Annex II of the Council Common Position on Burma 2004/730/CFSP and Annex IV of Council Regulation (EC) 798/2004, as inserted by Article 1(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1853/2004;...
Asked by
Marquess of Lothian
(Conservative)
Answered by
Jack Straw
(Labour)
Answering body
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Tabled on
11 November 2004
For answer on
17 November 2004
Answered on
17 November 2004
Mr. Ancram: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (1) what criteria were applied for a state-owned
enterprise's inclusion in Annex II of the Council Common Position on Burma 2004/730/CFSP and Annex IV of Council Regulation (EC)
798/2004, as inserted by Article 1(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1853/2004; [198383]
(2) for what reason Myanmar Oil and Gas Enterprise was excluded from Annex II of the Council Common Position on Burma 2004/730/CFSP
and Annex IV of Council Regulation (EC) 798/2004, as inserted by Article 1(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1853/ 2004. [198384]
Mr. Straw: The UK worked hard to get the strongest possible measures in the EU Common Position on Burma with the aim of highlighting
the role of the military in continuing human rights abuses and political stalemate in Burma, while targeting the measures to
minimise that impact on the poor.
The EU therefore chose to target the two military owned companies. Union of Myanmar Economic Holdings Ltd. (UMEHL) and the Myanmar
Economic Corporation (MEC), their subsidiaries and joint ventures. UMEHL and MEC have sought in recent years to monopolise foreign
investment. The profits directly benefit the military.
Myanmar Oil and Gas Enterprise is not a military owned company.
The decision amending the EU Common Position was made by unanimity.
Subjects
EU action; Sanctions; Myanmar; EU external relations; Myanmar Oil and Gas Enterprise
Date
17 November 2004
Reference
426 c1545-6W;426 c1549W; 198383;198384
House
House of Commons
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what steps have been taken since the occupation of Iraq to ensure that (a) members of the armed forces and other United Kingdom personnel and persons employed by contractors there comply with international human rights and humanitarian law, (b)...
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what steps have been taken since the occupation of Iraq to ensure that (a) members of the armed forces and other United Kingdom personnel and persons employed by contractors there comply with international human rights and humanitarian law, (b)...
Asked by
Lord Campbell of Pittenweem
(Liberal Democrat)
Answered by
Jack Straw
(Labour)
Answering body
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Tabled on
8 July 2004
For answer on
22 July 2004
Answered on
22 July 2004
Sir Menzies Campbell: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what steps have been taken since the
occupation of Iraq to ensure that (a) members of the armed forces and other United Kingdom personnel and persons employed by
contractors there comply with international human rights and humanitarian law, (b) there are effective safeguards and
sanctions against abuse by contractors and (c) there are effective remedies for any victims of such abuse. [183942]
Mr. Straw: [holding answer 20 July 2004]: I refer the right hon. Gentleman to the answer I gave to him today (UIN 183941).
UK armed forces personnel are subject to UK law as they would be in the UK. As in the UK or in other operational theatres, the
responsibility for enforcing the law lies with the Royal Military Police. Anyone found to have broken the law is dealt with
appropriately, but of course it is important to establish the facts first. This is what we are now doing with regard to allegations
against UK military personnel in Iraq.
The Coalition Provisional Authority put in place a number of regulations that apply to foreign contractors in Iraq. These
regulations are set out in CPA Order 17 and CPA Memorandum 17, which can be found on the CPA website at www.cpa-iraq.org.
Any claims arising from actions attributable to UK military personnel will be considered against UK national law.
Subjects
Abuse; Armed forces; Human rights; Iraq; International law; Victims; Sanctions; Private military and security companies
Date
22 July 2004
Reference
183942; 424 c541-2W;424 c542W
House
House of Commons
Answered by
Jack Straw
(Labour)
Asked by
Crispin Blunt
(Conservative)
Answering body
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
Type
Oral answers to questions
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what sanctions are available to the UK in response to unlawful killings by an occupying power (a) under the terms of the 4th Geneva Convention and (b) otherwise.
Subjects
Armed conflict; Homicide; Geneva Conventions; Treaties; Sanctions; Israel; Palestine; Middle East; Assassination; Yassin, Ahmed
Date
30 March 2004
Reference
419 c1403-4
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what sanctions are available to the UK in response to unlawful killings by an occupying power (a) under the terms of the 4th Geneva Convention and (b) otherwise.
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what sanctions are available to the UK in response to unlawful killings by an occupying power (a) under the terms of the 4th Geneva Convention and (b) otherwise.
Asked by
Crispin Blunt
(Conservative)
Answered by
Jack Straw
(Labour)
Answering body
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
Oral questions - Lead
Status
Answered
Tabled on
24 March 2004
For answer on
30 March 2004
Answered on
30 March 2004
Subjects
Armed conflict; Homicide; Geneva Conventions; Treaties; Sanctions; Israel; Palestine; Middle East; Assassination; Yassin, Ahmed
Date
30 March 2004
Reference
419 c1403-4; 164108
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
Answered by
Jack Straw
(Labour)
Answering body
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
Type
Oral answers to questions
Subjects
Armed conflict; Homicide; Geneva Conventions; Treaties; Sanctions; Israel; Palestine; Middle East; Assassination; Yassin, Ahmed
Date
30 March 2004
Reference
419 c1403-4
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what action can be taken against UK national companies involved in business with Zimbabwean companies classed as SDNs under United States Executive Order 13288; if he will make a statement on the extension of EU sanctions to include such...
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what action can be taken against UK national companies involved in business with Zimbabwean companies classed as SDNs under United States Executive Order 13288; if he will make a statement on the extension of EU sanctions to include such...
Asked by
Marquess of Lothian
(Conservative)
Answered by
Jack Straw
(Labour)
Answering body
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Tabled on
4 March 2004
For answer on
11 March 2004
Answered on
11 March 2004
Mr. Ancram: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what action can be taken against UK national
companies involved in business with Zimbabwean companies classed as SDNs under United States Executive Order 13288; if he will make
a statement on the extension of EU sanctions to include such measures; and when he expects EU sanctions to match those of the US.
[159889]
Mr. Straw: On 21 February 2004 the EU's restrictive measures were renewed and extended to a larger number of Zimbabwean
individuals who are responsible for policies that lead to the suppression of human rights, of the freedom of expression and of good
governance. One of the measures is an assets freeze against a new list of 95 individuals. The US has similar measures against only
77 individuals. It would therefore be a backward step for the EU's measures to "match" those of the US in this regard.
On 3 March, the US announced that it was also freezing the assets of seven companies, controlled by three of Mugabe's closest
confidantes--Information Minister Moyo, Speaker Mnangagwa and ex-Army Chief Zvinavashe. The UK and EU have already frozen the
identifiable assets of those individuals. The EU measures target individuals, not companies. The UK and other member states have
taken the view that targeting companies risks harming ordinary Zimbabweans who are already suffering under the present regime.
Subjects
EU action; Overseas companies; Sanctions; Zimbabwe
Date
11 March 2004
Reference
159889; 418 c1705-6W;418 c1707-8W
House
House of Commons
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what action is being taken by Her Majesty's Government to assist in the restoration of freedom and democracy in Zimbabwe.
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what action is being taken by Her Majesty's Government to assist in the restoration of freedom and democracy in Zimbabwe.
Asked by
Simon Hughes
(Liberal Democrat)
Answered by
Jack Straw
(Labour)
Answering body
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Tabled on
25 February 2004
For answer on
2 March 2004
Answered on
2 March 2004
Simon Hughes: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what action is being taken by Her Majesty's
Government to assist in the restoration of freedom and democracy in Zimbabwe. [157420]
Mr. Straw: The Government are providing practical and political support to civil society, human rights organisations and all those
in Zimbabwe who want to see an early return to a democratically accountable government which respects human rights and the rule of
law.
We are providing humanitarian assistance to millions of Zimbabwean people on the basis of need.
We are encouraging the South African government, and others in the region, to push for a return to democracy and freedom.
We have been a consistent advocate of a robust international approach. In December, we argued successfully to maintain Zimbabwe's
suspension from the Commonwealth. Mugabe has since withdrawn from the Commonwealth, demonstrating that he is now incapable of
meeting the Harare principles which he helped to establish.
This week, the EU extended sanctions against the Mugabe regime, rightly standing with the people of Zimbabwe, and against those
responsible--Mugabe and his government--for bringing a once prosperous and successful state to the edge of total collapse. The
number of those caught by the sanctions now rises from 79 to 95. Those we have added to the list include several individuals who
bear particular responsibility for the abuses of human rights in Zimbabwe.
Zimbabwe's opposition party welcomed this move, saying it was "a clear indication that the international community will not fold its
arms while the regime in Zimbabwe continues to trample upon people's basic human rights".
Subjects
Development aid; Democracy; EU action; Sanctions; Zimbabwe
Date
2 March 2004
Reference
418 c807-8W;418 c827-8W; 157420
House
House of Commons